Fostering Nonconformist Thinking in Companies?Dialogue with the Alter Ego on Squaring of a Triangle, first drafted on April 19, published on April 21, 2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is your organization a safe place to be non-consensus? Do those who work for you feel safe when they innovate, even if they are alone? You should frankly ask yourself these questions. Great leaders make it safe for others to innovate. And history then is written about those who were correct about new opportunities, even though there was no consensus.Stanford Prof. Barnett on Corporate Strategy

Question by Alter Ego of Noah denkt™ (AE): Recently, we have come across a host of academic work that explores the ability of companies to foster innovative, nonconformist thinking within their own ranks. (See for instance: James G. March, Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning, in: In Organization Science, Volume 2, Issue 1, May 1991, pp 71-87). We would be interested to know what Noah denkt™ thinks of this type of academic research? Obviously, we are well aware that this project has always taken a decidedly non-corporate approach opting for a maverick undertaking based on the philosophy of capitalistic existentialism. But is there a way to marry a daredevil attitude with an existence inside established corporate structures?

Answer by Noah denkt™ (Nd): It is true that we have consistently felt that nonconformist endeavors can flourish best in a nonconformist setting. In particular, it is the amount of risk taking that inevitably comes with a pioneering enterprise which has us thinking that such projects can best be implemented outside the institutional concern for self-preservation. Don’t forget that all institutions have a natural priority for safeguarding their own survival. Hence, it is not only difficult for them to accept the uncertainties that come with serious creative destruction but they also have a hard time to honestly contemplate their own demise.

AE: It is also true though that not all innovation is necessarily of the disruptive kind. There is, after all, the vast field of “continuous innovation” which never stops to improve the quality and features of existing products. Doesn‘t it make sense for companies to encourage an "out-of-the-box" thinking if only to maintain a cutting-edge position in that area of continuous innovation?

Nd: Perhaps. Nevertheless, we have a hard time to associate „The Nonconsensus Strategy“ (Bill Barnett) with the minor risk-taking of a continuous innovation. In fact, it seems to us that Mr. Barnett’s own example of Qualcomm's embrace of the wireless CDMA technology is pretty disruptive in itself. So, if you want to get serious about making a ground-breaking innovation happen you probably have to do that on your own account.

AE: Why then do intelligent people like Mr. Barnett continue to look for ways to integrate nonconformist thinking into standard corporate organizations?

Nd: The most immediate answer to that question is that those nonconformist thinkers are just as afraid as established institutions are to be entirely nonconformist themselves. In other words, they themselves shy away from assuming the near suicidal risk that comes with being a maverick entrepreneur. Hence, they look for ways to turn what by nature is an excruciatingly difficult undertaking into a more convenient, socially compatible enterprise.

AE: It does payoff though to do that, doesn't it? Both James March and Bill Bartlett are highly reputed Stanford professors. They receive a decent salary, they get quoted in The Economist and they don’t have to suffer the intellectual exclusion that the likes of us who are working on their own “Noah denkt™-Project” have to endure.

Nd: Of course. But don’t forget that, contrary to Profs March and Barnett, people like us don’t have to continuously engage in trying to square a triangle in order to feel useful. That is a comfort in itself, isn't it? At least, it gives us peace of mind.

AE: Well, we are not so sure about that: Just look at our never ending dialogues! They do not really sound like peace of mind to us! And nor do they portray a mindset that is void of the need to square triangles!

Nd: But come on, we quite enjoy these exchanges, don’t we? At least, we don’t mind going on record in saying so….

Reminder: Noah denkt™ is a project of Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards and his Landei Selbstverlag (WL & his LSV). Consequently, all rights to the texts that have been published under the Noah denkt™brand name are reserved by WL & his LSV.

The commentary and the reasoning that was provided on this page is for informational and/or educational purposes only and it is not intended to provide tax, legal or investment advice. It should therefore not be construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any security or any issuer by WL & his LSV or its Noah denkt™ Project. In fact, WL & his LSV encourage the user to understand that he alone is responsible for determining whether any investment, security or strategy is appropriate or suitable for him. And to leave no doubt as to what this means we urge our user to also note our extended Legal Notice.